1. NSP BOARD SESSION June 21-22, 2001 Indianapolis, IN

2. 2 Presentation Overview  Association Focus  Research Member-at-Large Survey Education/Program Leaders Survey Phone Interviews with Related Organizations Focus Groups with NSAA Members  Lessons Learned and Implications  Increasing Value

3. 3 Association Focus Problem Statement: Historically, NSP has tended focus on internal matters and preserving of the status quo. Now, due to rapid change within the snowsports industry, NSP finds itself increasingly out of touch with industry trends and unable to respond to our ski area partners. We must change to recapture a leadership role in the industry.

4. 4 Association Focus Charge to the G.1 Committee: The G.1 Committee was directed by the NSP Board of Directors to research and present a process to implement a change to the NSP governance and structure.

5. 5 Association Focus Board Mission Statement: The function of the NSP Board of Directors will change to address strategic national issues important to the organization. This change will result in a business model that will be more effective for members and industry stakeholders.

6. 6 Association Focus  As a result of the board’s work, NSP membership is satisfied and growing is a dynamic and valued partner in the outdoor recreation industry will be an enabler for all industry stakeholders will provide the credential of choice

7. 7 Association Focus  As a result of the board’s work, NSP (continued) members and ski area managers will feel indispensable to one another will be a leader in outdoor recreation industry value will be increased in the marketplace by virtue of its being a problem solver for industry

8. 8 NSP Background  26,245 NSP members  8,000 members in education ranks (Instructor through Program Director)  1,060 receive POB  Members’ average age is 44  9,544 education course attendees in FY 2000  624 Local Patrols  Members by years of membership: 0 - 5 yrs -- 37% 5 - 10 yrs -- 20% 10 - 15 yrs -- 15.2% 15 - 20 yrs -- 3.8% 20+ yrs -- 19.9%

9. 9 Member Survey: Years as NSP Member

10. 10 Member Survey: Frequency of Connection with NSP by Level Never Local2% Section51% Region53% Division53% National49% 1-3x per year Local8% Section30% Region33% Division35% National40% 6+ per year Local75% Section2% Region0% Division2% National3%

11. 11 Member Survey: Continuing Interest

12. 12 Member Survey: Why Remain a Member?

13. 13 General Members: Lessons Learned  Local patrol is main reference point for members followed by the national organization (though members may have limited understanding of national services)  Members have relatively little direct contact with regions, sections, and divisions  Members are positive about the services they perform and their expectations about their role as a patroller are being met

14. 14 Implications  Better communication is needed to overcome member-at-large confusion about NSP’s levels and layers  NSP must review the function and necessity of all the organization’s levels

15. 15 Education Group: Number of Years as an NSP Member

16. 16 Education Group: Frequency of Connection with NSP by Level 1-3x per year Local 11% Section 36% Region 36% Division 48% National 53% 4-6x per year Local 5% Section 14% Region 14% Division 7% National 11% >6 per year Local85% Section12% Region12% Division 11% National 9% Never Local 0% Section 36% Region 36% Division 34% National 27%

17. 17 Education Group: Continuing Interest

18. 18 Education Group: What Do You Receive from Involvement in NSP?

19. 19 Education Group: What Do You Know About Becoming a Leader in NSP?

20. 20 Education Group: Lessons Learned  The political process is often seen as adversely affecting the education process  Instructors do not perceive themselves as future NSP leaders 40% don’t know the process for becoming a leader  No one effective method of communicating program changes to program personnel  Frequency of communication implies inconsistency from bottom up and top down

21. 21 Education Group: Implications  NSP needs to gain control and direction over its education courses and training  NSP needs to address issues surrounding disenchantment and burnout  Program personnel are vital to NSP’s business strategy

22. 22 NSAA FOCUS GROUPS  Two focus groups Community areas Destination resorts  May 8 & 9, 2001  La Quinta, California (NSAA Convention)

23. 23 NSAA Focus Groups  Topics Discussed Major concerns/ “Hot Topics” Role of the patroller — current & future View of NSP Channels of communication Scope of ski area management & services Future Issues & relationships Open comments

24. 24 NSAA Focus Groups Scope of ski area management & services in terms of partnership with patroller s  Would like volunteer patrollers to do the same work as professional patrollers, except for avalanche work  Prefer to treat patrollers like employees: i.e., they have most employee privileges and need to mesh their services with employee services  Would like patrollers to buy into resort philosophy: take pride in resort and treat people like customers  Would like volunteers to take on a professional approach to their role

25. 25 NSAA Focus Groups Future issues & relationships  Customer service and guest services will continue to increase in importance  Ski areas know they need to train patrollers in awareness of guest services  Concerned about time commitment required by volunteer patrollers for each NSP skill level  Believe that there will be less volunteer patrollers and more professional patrollers

26. 26 NSAA FOCUS GROUPS Future Issues & Relationships (continued)  Ski areas know that industry is changing and patrollers must adapt too  Recruiting continues to be a problem (Finding alpine patrollers is difficult and finding nordic patrollers is almost impossible)  Patrollers must be careful not to exceed NSP standard of care  NSP needs an image that is current with the industry

27. 27 NSAA Focus Groups Open comments  NSP is a great organization, fortunate to have the NSP patrollers  NSP should help areas find new patrollers (concerns about the next generation of patrollers)  Organizational structure needs to be streamlined  Stay focused on core purpose of NSP, which is education and public awareness of safe skiing

28. 28 NSAA Focus Groups: Lessons Learned  Confusion over “who is in charge of what?”  Opportunities for collaboration  Opportunity for patrollers to be part of the skier’s positive experience  Guest service needs to be an integral part of the patroller’s function

29. 29 NSAA Focus Groups: Implications  NSP needs to work together with NSAA on developing joint programs and industry strategies Guest services, guest experiences, growing the sport  Increased communication needed between NSAA and NSP  NSP needs to deliver a clear message about the value of its members and services to ski areas

30. 30 Related Organizations  American Avalanche Association  Canadian Ski Patrol  National Association for Search & Rescue  National Ski Areas Association  Midwest Ski Areas Association  Ski Maine Association  Professional Ski Patroller Association  U.S. Forest Service

31. 31 Related Organizations: Interview Questions  What are the “hot topics” in your segment of the industry?  What business challenges have you experienced in the past 3-5 years?  What is your view/opinion of NSP?  What is you relationship with NSP (all levels)?  Within the industry, where do you see NSP?  If you could say one thing to NSP, what would it be?

32. 32 Related Organizations: Lessons Learned  All organizations are experiencing changes in the ski industry, i.e., decreasing membership and decreasing number of ski areas  NSP is in danger of losing its role in the industry due to isolationist behavior, i.e., the industry is changing and so must NSP to remain relevant

33. 33 Related Organizations: Implications  NSP needs to take a greater role within the ski industry and recognize that the industry must work as a team for its own survival  NSP must stop thinking about internal politics and start thinking strategically about the industry

34. 34 RECAP: Lessons Learned  All membership organizations are experiencing rapid changes in the ski industry  NSP’s isolationist behavior endangers its position, and must change to remain relevant  Guest service needs to be an integral part of the patroller’s function  Confusion over “who is in charge of what?” is compounded by bureaucracy and layers  The political process is often seen as adversely affecting the education process

35. 35 We’ve gathered data and asked hard questions. Now what?

36. 36 The Next Steps The NSP board is in a good position to:  Make decisions about structural and procedural operations of NSP  Make decisions about its own effectiveness, size and structure  Develop a plan for change and take that plan back to NSP Divisions and other stakeholders for input  Focus on the business strategy for NSP  Deliver unique value to stakeholders